1. Patients launch $1.27 million crowdfunding campaign for ME/CFS gut microbiome study.
    Check out the website, Facebook and Twitter. Join in donate and spread the word!
New Exercise Study Brings Both Illumination and Questions
Simon McGrath looks at new objective evidence of abnormal response to exercise in ME/CFS patients, and the questions that researchers are still trying to answer ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Wessely honoured with a knighthood for his work for GWS and ME

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS News' started by Countrygirl, Dec 29, 2012.

  1. Wildcat

    Wildcat Senior Member

    Messages:
    721
    Likes:
    801
  2. Wildcat

    Wildcat Senior Member

    Messages:
    721
    Likes:
    801
  3. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,339
    Likes:
    9,115
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    According to the document at http://www.lloyd-gwii.com/admin/ManagedFiles/2/GWI1008 00.doc these are Simon Wessely's statements regarding GWS:
    The "mixture of these three things" is pretty similar to Wessely's proposed onset and perpetuation of CFS: maybe there was a physical factor, but it's totally gone now. People still think they're sick because of psychological (and maybe social) factors.
    taniaaust1, Bob and Wildcat like this.
  4. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,339
    Likes:
    9,115
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    They should work if you just click on them. Copy and paste won't work though, because the forum abbreviates the appearance of links in threads, and leaves out a chunk.
  5. Wildcat

    Wildcat Senior Member

    Messages:
    721
    Likes:
    801
    thanks, i must have glitches - when i click the link i just end up further up this thread page
  6. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,339
    Likes:
    9,115
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    Oh, you're right :p They link to this thread, but the link text looks like it's to a different thread.
  7. Wildcat

    Wildcat Senior Member

    Messages:
    721
    Likes:
    801
    .
    Prof wessely also states in his evidence to the 2004 gulf war illnes inquiry that he asked the MOD for research money but the MODsaid no. he said that he then asked the american military who said yes, and so funded the epidemiological study that he is talking about at the inquiry..
    taniaaust1 likes this.
  8. Firestormm

    Firestormm Guest

    Messages:
    5,824
    Likes:
    5,975
    Cornwall England
    I am not going to comment on GWI. However, I have read the linked testimony and it does make interesting reading. Have you read it all? I could of course take further extracts from it and we could discuss your interpretation further - but I won't.

    Val, and Bob, I have enough trouble getting my head around ME and all the stuff that my diagnosis attracts. I can't research and read all that I need to (apparently) to engage with you about GWS.

    I have read the blog about the 'new' science. I can't say I have seen these ' two peer reviewed' papers making much of a splash elsewhere. But then I haven't/don't follow GWS. Maybe they featured somewhere I don't know.

    I sincerely hope that those afflicted with GWS are shown some light in terms of a 'biological' cause from these two papers. I hope they prove to be 'game-changers' in terms of treatment and recognition as some seem to think.

    Judging from the comments - some of the comments - there is a lot of doubt about that. There is also a feeling that any 'credible' cause has been hidden in some sort of mass conspiracy.

    Again, I simply cannot get into all of this. Christ we get dragged into enough directions as it is and I can't handle another one. If you feel that Wessely is again being honoured for something he should not; then I am hardly in a position to dissuade you.

    However, the arguments I have read that attempt to convey this are not convincing. Not to me anyway. If you feel that some who are working for 'us' should have been honoured then why not nominate them and their efforts in the future?

    Anyone can do so - hell you can even do it on-line these days apparently.

    Adios :nerd:
  9. Min

    Min Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,196
    Likes:
    1,236
    UK
    Wildcat likes this.
  10. Firestormm

    Firestormm Guest

    Messages:
    5,824
    Likes:
    5,975
    Cornwall England
    Good luck. I'd be interested to see how many sign this and what (if any) impact it will have. Not even sure if such a thing can be revoked because of even partial non-UK or public demand.

    These honours are not democratic and never have been. Personally I think they should. Rather like the voting in charity award nominations that are all the rage today.
  11. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,236
    Likes:
    11,381
    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    This petition is up to 40 votes. I do not think it will or even can achieve its stated goal. However it will send a message that there are many who are unhappy with the knighthood.
    Wildcat likes this.
  12. Jarod

    Jarod Senior Member

    Messages:
    764
    Likes:
    431
    planet earth
    I'd say leave the knighthood designation in tact, so we can see what kind of company Knighthood keeps.

    Dr Simon Wessley, and Jimmy Saville, and Alan Stanford are the Knights that I know of; Other than Richard Branson......

    Sir Alan Stanford($7 billion doollar ponzi scheme knight) is serving a 110 years in jail by the way......

    We should start a petition for who else deserves knighthood!! George W Bush? Alan Greenspan? William Reeves? Dick Cheney? Donald Rumsfeld? Jerry Sandusky? Osama Bin Landen, Larry Silverstein. Michael Aquino (NSA)

    How does one get KNighthood?

    Somebody that is articulate please Go for it! :thumbsup:
    http://www.gopetition.com/
  13. Valentijn

    Valentijn Activity Level: 3

    Messages:
    6,339
    Likes:
    9,115
    Amersfoort, Netherlands
    I dare say it's because you haven't read much of Wessely's research. Over the past week, I have.

    He starts with the premise that CFS is just a point on the spectrum of fatigue. To him, CFS is Fatigue. Okay, fine - he can have his opinion.

    Then he conducts studies on fatigued patients with somatic symptoms. Most of these studies involve the use of psychiatric questionnaires. Some of these questionnaires (such as the General Health Questionnaire) will interpret the symptoms of any systemic illness as indicating definite psychiatric illness. Wessely also shows a tendency to select non-somatization questionnaires where questions aimed at depression or anxiety are phrased in a manner that will come up positive for someone with significant physical or cognitive limitations. Then, based on the overlap of physical symptoms in both CFS and these questionnaires, he concludes that the vast majority of CFS patients have psychiatric disorder.

    These psychiatric findings pair up nicely with his belief that CFS = fatigue. Additional symptoms can easily be blamed on psychiatric disorders, hence him waffling on repeatedly about outcome being worse with more severe psychiatric disorder/more symptoms. This allows him the much-used "out" of blaming the patient's beliefs about symptom causation for poor prognosis.

    In psychiatric research with controls, the controls are typically poorly matched - people with illnesses that are not systemic, such as muscular disorder or broken limbs, or even healthy controls. Naturally those controls will have fewer physical symptoms and score mentally healthier on the carefully selected questionnaires.

    Conversely, in physical studies he will sometimes exclude anyone with psychiatric disorder. Depending on the questionnaires or other criteria used to determine psychiatric disorder, this could have the effect of excluding CFS patients with much of anything other than fatigue.

    In biological, but not psychiatric, research involving Wessely, there is always a disclaimer to the effect that all relevant physical findings are controversial and contradictory. When abnormalities are found, there is usually an attribution to psychiatric causation (based on the psychiatric questionnaires). On the rare occasion that there is not a psychiatric attribution, Wessely is usually far down on the list of authors, and he tends to ignore those papers in his future research - somewhat remarkable considering how extensively he cites to himself.

    Then we get to treatment, which is aimed at changing the beliefs that are presumed to perpetuate symptoms. Wessely's vague grasp of ethics says it's wrong to lie outright to patients, but it's strongly recommended to fundamentally mislead them for the purpose of maintaining the doctor-patient relationship. He acknowledges that if most of us knew what the biopsychosocial school thought about our symptoms, we would walk out, and seek out doctors that will tell us what we want to hear (and condemn us to an eternity of illness in the process).

    If you aren't willing to read his papers (it does impart a rather remarkable feeling of filth), the highlights are at http://forums.phoenixrising.me/index.php?threads/simon-wessely-quotes.21025/#post-319726 . Links to sources, mostly at his own website, are included, in case anyone is skeptical about issues regarding context and such.
    GracieJ, Bob and Wildcat like this.
  14. In Vitro Infidelium

    In Vitro Infidelium Guest

    Messages:
    646
    Likes:
    280
    People should explore the legal and regulatory processes before setting petitions, it's not as if the internet isn't full of the damn stuff -

    Forfeiture Committee: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honours_Forfeiture_Committee
    Forfeiture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders...s_of_the_United_Kingdom#Refusal_or_forfeiture
    Revocations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._medals_of_the_United_Kingdom#Knight_Bachelor

    The only sort of modern precedent is Fred (the Shred) Godwin but like the other modern forfeitures this was based on behaviour following the award, not as a reappraisal of the grounds of award itself.

    For anyone actually intending to petition the UK parliament there are two choices, the informal one: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/ which has no guarntee of being noticed (at least not without at least 100,000 signatures ) - or the formal one http://www.parliament.uk/get-involved/have-your-say/petitioning/public-petitions/. The formal one needs a sponsoring MP - but at least doesn't need the 17thC language that was required up until ten years ago.

    Anyway, no one in Government or Parliament as a whole, at least not anyone with clout, is going to get involved in what looks like a snide campaign of disparagement against an eminent academic who works for the NHS and has worked specifically with 'wounded soldiers'. One might as well start a campaign to have Bradley Wiggin's stripped of his Knighthood on the basis of his having embarrassingly silly sideburns (and claim there is true !). The only thing that petitions like this do is add to Wessely's kudos amongst the Standing Up For Science afficianados and affirm the support of his colleagues at King's and elsewhere.

    IVI
  15. Nico

    Nico Senior Member

    Messages:
    134
    Likes:
    184
    Wildcat likes this.
  16. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,140
    Likes:
    10,508
    England, UK
    Sorry to confuse. They're just links to posts in this thread.
    I was just directing Firestormm to earlier posts in this discussion thread.
  17. Wildcat

    Wildcat Senior Member

    Messages:
    721
    Likes:
    801
    ah - lol!
    Bob likes this.
  18. orion

    orion Senior Member

    Messages:
    101
    Likes:
    64
    UK
    I just shrugged my shoulders when I heard this news. I mean does anyone still take the honours system seriously? You only have to look at the types of people who typically get given honours to realise what a joke it is - failed/has been politicians, shady businessman who have donated money to a political party, career civil servants, minor celebrities, the list of unimpressive, undeserving people goes on and on. Almost no one who gets a knighthood really deserves it. Jimmy Savile is just the tip of a very large iceberg.

    Anyway, this latest award might give the impression that Wessely is currently untouchable, but let's not forget that Roy Meadows was also given a knighthood before his spectacular fall from grace.
    Bob and Valentijn like this.
  19. Bob

    Bob

    Messages:
    8,140
    Likes:
    10,508
    England, UK
    So does that mean that the patients' are at fault again?

    As alex3619 said, a petition won't get the knighthood reversed, but it will send a message of, and create a record of, dissent.
    Valentijn and Wildcat like this.
  20. In Vitro Infidelium

    In Vitro Infidelium Guest

    Messages:
    646
    Likes:
    280
    I dunno, are 'patients' collectively involved ? It's about choices and about how a minority (in this case 'us' collectively) choose to present themselves to the majority (rest of the world). At about this point in these exchanges someone usually pipes up about individual freedom - so yes folks who want to be free to sign up to petitions can do that, and folks like me who think that presenting a group collectively in a way that achieves no useful purpse are free to point out the futility of such actions.
    A message to who ? Dissent from what ? No one with any influence on anything that has any relevance to research in to M.E/CFS or services for patients is going to give a stuff about dissent or its record. All this type of petition does(nonsensical as it is - all hooey about calling on the UK Government), if anyone outside the closed world from which they are generated, actually notices it, is confirm that there are a bunch of ill informed, bitter and/or uncharitable and/or obsessive people with axes to grind that lack any obvious legitimacy. For deserved parody see the products of Dave and Deirdre Spart, Private Eye ad nauseum http://www.private-eye.co.uk/eyeplayer.php?media=128

    IVI

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page